California Surveyors Forums

In doing an ALTA over a Lot Line Adjustment I prepared several years ago I discovered I missed a course in my description and plat.

I have never had to correct a LLA before so I contacted the title company to get their opinion. The pointed me to the City and see if they had a process.

The City said that I can prepare a Certificate of Correction for the LLA.

Section 66469 of the SMA does not mention correcting a LLA, only maps.

What are your thoughts on correcting my LLA? Cert of Correction or is there another way?

Thanks in advance!

My first guess is another LLA, but you know that I ask you for help when it comes to the SMA.

Were the perfecting deeds done correctly, or in accordance with the incorrect LLA?

The deeds were based on the incorrect LLA.

We might be doing another LLA anyway for another area but my existing legals would still be incorrect.

Since you are talking about title transfer documents and there is no mention of LLA Cert of Correction in the SMA, then I would assume you need to do a new LLA and record new deeds to correct it. Maybe it can be done in conjunction with the other LLA you are planning to do?

Maybe it allows for a cert of correction in the city's LLA portion of their ordinance?

This is an error and nothing more. Are the two property owners in agreement? If so, record a reformation deed. Do not involve the city. I posted this 4 years ago. I hope it helps:
What you are referring to is called "reformation." Section 3399 of the Civil Code provides, "When, through fraud or a mutual mistake of the parties, or a mistake of one party, which the other at the time knew or suspected, a written contract does not truly express the intention of the parties, it may be revised on the application of a party aggrieved, so as to express that intention, so far as it can be done without prejudice to rights acquired by third persons, in good faith and for value."

It is well settled that the remedy of reformation is equitable in nature and not restricted to the exact situations stated in section 3399. (Demetris v. Demetris (1954) 125 Cal.App.2d 440, 443.)

If I was you and if there are no disputes between the parties and no reason to contest your conclusions and opinions, you should seek to "reform" or correct the deed. I would consult with a title company and get their concurrence and then obtain the consent of the affected parties.

The law provides a process and remedy for mistakes and errors as everything does not have to be litigated.

Good luck.
**********************

http://clsaforum.californiasurveyors.or ... -2486.html

Ryan - Turns out we are going to be doing another LLA over this parcel with two others in the near future, but I'm going to fix it before the LLA anyway.

Mike - Turns out there isn't two owners in this area, just the one owner and city ROW. It is an unusual situation where we prepared a final map over an old lot and block map where the city abandoned several old streets. The line I skipped way a portion of the boundary along the abandonment.

Dave - Hmmm, that is debatable...I have a call where I say "THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT ## THE FOLLOWING 10 COURSES:" There should have been 11 courses but I screwed up. The line I left out was a 0.14' piece along an old CL where the city abandoned part of the street (on my map) and the established lots on either side did not line up perfectly across from one another. Since I call out as going along the boundary of the lot I feel it is clear and that this is an error does not truely "alter any right, title or interest in the real property reflected"...but as I said, I'm sure that is debatable. I don't feel an ROS is needed in this case since we just (2007) surveyed the site and prepared a final map.

Thanks to all for your help!
M

I say no on the Certificate of Correction unless the City has that written into their ordinance. I would be surprised if it is in there. Even if it is, it does not repair the deeds.

I like the refromation deed, never heard of it but i like it.

And I like the record of survey idea, even if you don't tie it to anything on the ground. Show the correct line, the two deeds, the line between them and an explanation of why you believe that the line is where you show it. If you can use the legal description in the deed, to explain the error, so much the better. That might be enough if you can't get the owners to sign a refromation deed.

George Marchenko

A Lot Line Adjustment is an exclusion from the SMA, so the SMA would have nothing in it to regulate a correction to errors within deeds that effected the LLA. Looking to the SMA is looking in the wrong place. §66412 begins with "This division shall be inapplicable to any of the following:", and then goes on to include LLAs in subsection (d).

You said the deeds and plat you prepared omitted a course. Was the plat graphically correct other than an omitted course label? If so, there was no misrepresentations that would have affected the review and approval.

The local agency approval is not the LLA. It is merely the clearance to go through with the LLA as proposed. It is the executed deeds that are the LLA. The line is moved by conveyance by the parties, not by administrative approval of a local planning functionary.

The City, Woodcutter and Mike have the right answer. File corrective deeds that include the previously omitted course and be done with it.

From what you describe, I don't see a RS being a necessary element of this correction. As Mike said, coordinate with the title company, explain it to the landowners, making it clear that the error does not affect them in any practical way (won't need to move any improvements and doesn't move their line as established), and that your company is picking up the cost of the correction. They only need to sign the corrective deeds before you or the title company file them.

Evan has it right. We have recorded corrective documents which state in boldface at the top "This Lot Line Adjustment Approval is being re-recorded in order to include an omitted course in Exhibit 'A' of Instrument No. 2010-XXXXXXX" for example.
Subsequent deeds then refer to the lots described and depicted on the later document. This is satisfactory to the title companies.